Discretion is being able to raise your eyebrow and not your voice.
Might be a good idea and practice for the new and old Congress, State Legislature and Governor.
Get more done?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A discussion of policy, politics and culture in government and society.
I disagree. It's true that due to arguments raised by new and old congress things are slowed down and less is done, but at least things are being discussed. If no one raises any opinions or speaks about their concerns or issues then that's not much of a democracy in my opinion. Yes, it takes a while because no two people are going to agree on everything, and no two people are exactly alike, but that is one of the greatest benefits to living in a democracy. If you or congress finds something wrong then you have a voice and a right to use it. What's the sense in living in a democracy if no one ever speaks up and uses their voice. I do however agree there has to be a better and faster way to get things done, however discretion is not the way.
ReplyDeleteThis statement I would have to disagree. Discretion is the ability to or the power to decide or act according to one's own judgment. Without voicing your own opinion how would Congress accomplish any legislation. I think people act with discretion on how they approach a subject, but I feel that people express their own opinion in hopes to add some innovation to a piece of legislation. If everyone were to have to agree on something then we might as well live in a Communist country. So with the formation of our new Congress in Washington I hope that we can keep conversation and communication in tact between democrats and republicans.
ReplyDeleteI think there should definitely be more respect for the legislative process and there shouldn't be a high number of unneeded delays and obstructions to stop legislation. The Republicans used a record number of filibusters the last two years and as a result many important things weren't accomplished. It is one thing to disagree with an opponents view and its one thing to filibuster a bill when it is truly atrocious to the American people, but only one senator voted against the Patriot Act and there were no filibusters, but there probably should have been. When filibusters become the norm and legislation can't get passed just because the other side doesn't want your agenda passed that is when voicing your opposition has gone too far.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Danielle. People should speak up and let their opinions be heard. If they don't voice new and innovative ideas for our country, then they would be going back on their campaign promises.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Aaron in that argument simply for the the sake of argument and party affiliation should be less frequent. If a piece of legislation is going to benefit a lot of people, it shouldn't be stopped because two parties don't agree. Our countries leaders need to do a better job of working across the aisle, and I also think that they should pick their battles more carefully.
ReplyDeleteI agree with plapoint, danielle on that people should raise their opinions and let them be heard. Although I think that we should left a couple for eyebrows when people's personal views are far out, like allowing concealed guns on campus, this should never be allowed and is endangering the public at large. But gun totting activist keep pushing for the unpopular. This is where we get into trouble, when people start looking to much to individual agendas, then the greater good for the great population. But democracy is an amazing thing and everyone has a voice, so I guess everyone has the right to have that voice heard. But standstills or unpopular agenda's should have limitations on how long they can be debated over. This way to speed up our law making process.
ReplyDelete